Assumption of guilt

[alwynsw]

Some see gun control and registration laws as invasions of privacy, future conviscations rolls, or they see tham as being in contravention of the 2ns Amendment.

Others see them as reasonable measures to keep firearms out of the hands of criminals and others who for other reasons should not possess a firearm.

Still others see the registration and recordkeeping process as an assumption of future guilt. The assumption being that the firearm being transferred will someday be used in a crime.

What's your position?

What's mine? I have no problem with background checks before purchase. I believe that convicted felons and the mentally unsound should be barred ownership. I believe that all records of such a check should be destroyed immediately except for a copy of the approval that is kept by the purchaser for his/her future defense.

In the case of EPO's and DVO's, ownership should not be barred until the offender is adjucated as being a threat. EPO's and DVO's are too easy to get. He/she says they are in fear, the order is automatically entered. No proof necessary - at least in my state.

[lcordero]

1. I don't believe in background checks either

Law-abiding citizens shouldn't have to ask permission for anything from anybody.
A person becomes a law-abiding citizen once they have paid their debt to society in full.
Barring the mentally unsound means that there will be no medical privacy, that would mean that my medical records, whether I am healthy or not, would be open to whoever wants to see them, I AIN'T HAVING THAT EITHER.

[Columbia]

2. I agree

I think the problem lies in our incarceration system. People are being let out of prison who are still a danger to society. These violent criminals should be put in prison and stay there until they are truly rehabilitated. After they pay their debt to society, they should regain all their rights including their right to vote and right to keep and bear arms.

Of course, this would be a logistical disaster since the prisons are already overcrowded. My solution to this would be to end the war on drugs and/or put all non-violent drug offenders in rehab facilities or monitoring/probation programs. This would free up enough space to keep violent criminals in prison to the length of their sentences and beyond if necessary. I believe this would also reduce crime by eliminating the deadly drug black-market, which would even further increase room in prison for truly violent offenders.

[MrSandman]

3. Good points Columbia,

on the domestic violence petitions...only after a hearing at which the defendant/restrained party has had an opportunity to represent a case. Family judge should be given some discretion on the firearms posession.

ed...agreed w/ disposal of approved NICS records...more prosecution of valid denoals.

[CO Liberal]

4. I DO Believe in Background Checks

Law-abiding citizens shouldn't have to ask permission for anything from anybody.

Background checks are designed to protect society in general from assholes who need to be separated from firearms on account of their own actions (personal histories of violence or criminal activity) or mental illness.

I guess you're opposed to walking through metal detectors in airports, too - right???

[Paladin]

5. Well Said, CO

n/t

[Columbia]

6. I understand your reservations

"Background checks are designed to protect society in general from assholes who need to be separated from firearms on account of their own actions (personal histories of violence or criminal activity) or mental illness."

Despite the design of background checks, it sure doesn't stop so-called "assholes" being separated from firearms does it? I know where you are coming from, and I don't want violent criminals to have weapons either, but background checks just don't cut it. Heavy prosecution and incarceration of violent criminals who use firearms would.

[CO Liberal]

7. Columbia...

...background checks just don't cut it. Heavy prosecution and incarceration of violent criminals who use firearms would.

Too little, too late. What you propose sounds good, but it's like locking the barn door after the horse gets out.

Sure, the bad guys should be punished AFTER committing a crime. But I'm also interested in preventing the crime in the first place.

[Columbia]

9. I'd like that too

"But I'm also interested in preventing the crime in the first place."

Background checks don't do that though. Criminals easily bypass them by going to the black-market. Most violent criminals are repeat offenders. Keep them in jail and watch crime drop like a rock.

[CO Liberal]

11. Then Eliminate the Black Market

Quadruple the sentences for knowingkly selling a gun to a felon. THEN watch crime drop like a rock.

[Columbia]

12. Hmm..

How you going to do that? It's already illegal to sell a gun to a felon, that's why a black market exists. You will never be able to eliminate it. Just look at the war on drugs and Prohibition - both utter failures.

[slackmaster]

22. Quadruple the sentences - Having a flashback now - Quadruple the sentences

That's exactly what the federal government did back in 1951 when it decided to get REALLY tough on the marijuana prohibition and passed the Boggs Act.

http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/History/whiteb1.htm

Prohibition - Having another flashback - Prohibition...

[lcordero]

8. Let's get a few things crystal clear

1. people who have paid their debt to society in full are not criminals any longer, they become law-abiding citizens.

2. a person that is intent on doing bad on another person will ALWAYS find a way to get a weapon.

3. leaving people vulnerable is akin to treachery.

4. opening my medical records for any reason whether I'm healthy or not is TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE!!!

5. taking away rights is not liberal.

[Columbia]

10. All excellent points

[CO Liberal]

13. Counterpoints

1. people who have paid their debt to society in full are not criminals any longer, they become law-abiding citizens.

Depending on what state you live in, felons cannot vote once they leave prison. If they can't be trusted with a vote, why should they be trusted with a gun?


2. a person that is intent on doing bad on another person will ALWAYS find a way to get a weapon.

Then you do whatever it takes to keep guns out of their hands. Even if it means everyone else has to fill out one more form or wait a little bit to get a gun.


3. leaving people vulnerable is akin to treachery.

Not even close.


4. opening my medical records for any reason whether I'm healthy or not is TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE!!!

Medical records may be one thing, but mental health records are something else entirely.


5. taking away rights is not liberal.

"Ensuring the general welfare", however, is. And it's mandated by teh Constitution.

[lcordero]

14. your points are moot

Depending on what state you live in, felons cannot vote once they leave prison. If they can't be trusted with a vote, why should they be trusted with a gun?

And I repeat again, because they paid their debt to society. What race do a disproportional percentage of former felons belong to? Where do there felons come from and what walks of life do they come from?

Then you do whatever it takes to keep guns out of their hands. Even if it means everyone else has to fill out one more form or wait a little bit to get a gun.

This solution has NEVER worked and has made congress ballsy in what kind of legislation they pass, a good example of this is the overtime pay takeaway. Do you honestly think that Congress would take overtime pay away if everybody had a gun?

Not even close.

You are wrong. Go here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=118&topic_id=33100#33258

Medical records may be one thing, but mental health records are something else entirely.

I don't care if you don't want your privacy protected but I will have my privacy respected in every circumstance. My privacy will be respected even if it means dying from no treatment. THERE IS NO MIDDLE GROUND

"Ensuring the general welfare", however, is. And it's mandated by teh Constitution.

Ensuring the general rape is more like it.

[CO Liberal]

17. Just How Do You Manage Going Thru Life Day-to-Day??

It sounds like you think the world is out to get you.

[lcordero]

20. If you haven't noticed

The average person has been getting smashed in the face at every turn.
This is everything from "partial birth abortion", to overtime pay takeaways, to aggressive first-strike looting and ethnic cleansing wars(Iraq), to taking away due process rights, to not being able to get medical care, to cuttin away at the education system, to protestors getting kicked and bashed in the face for no reason.
In this day and age, it seems that the word "moderate" means taking the worst policies of both sides of the spectrum.

on edit: This isn't just Republicans because we got sold out.

[MrBenchley]

24. Amazing...simply amazing

I must admit...I cannot imagine any scenario where having a popgun in your fist helps reverse the partial birth abortion restriction. What are you going to do...take congress hostage? Threaten doctors who refuse to perform the procedure?

Same with overtime pay...Seems to me the way to get this idiotic decision reversed is to work hard to PERSUADE others to elect a Democratic president and a Congress that will back him up....not wave my popgun around and shout NRA lies about Democrats taking my guns away.

Especially since its the scummy PRO-GUN politicans who are responsible for the crap you're moaning about here.

[lcordero]

25. Like Mike Rivero from wrh says,

"No matter how many times a gun ban causes cirme to RISE, the gun-grabbers still keep grabbing your guns. Why? Because an armed citizenry can say "NO" to the government. When you lose your guns, you lose the freedom to say "NO", and there is no freedom at all without the freedom to say "NO"."

Same with overtime pay...Seems to me the way to get this idiotic decision reversed is to work hard to PERSUADE others to elect a Democratic president and a Congress that will back him up....not wave my popgun around and shout NRA lies about Democrats taking my guns away.
I'm not lifting so much as a finger to help a slimebag into office just so that he can ignore me.

BTW...Bush* and Arnold are gun grabbers too if you haven't noticed. I already know that gun grabbers are not exclusive to the Democratic Party.

[MrBenchley]

27. Too frigging funny...

Mike Rivero? Hokay.

"BTW...Bush* and Arnold are gun grabbers too"
Wow.....if you're so far gone that Bush seems anti-gun to you.....

[lcordero]

28. How can all the males in Switzerland be issued assault rifles

and have very little crime?
http://www.theblessingsofliberty.com/articles/article11.html

Anything that the government has should be commercially available.

On edit: The only way that a person understands or will comply with anything is with a threat to do bodily harm. I do not trust the government to have weapons by themselves and I NEVER WILL. Why the hell do you think that all of these laws that hurt people get passed?

[MrBenchley]

29. Who the hell are you trying to kid?

Every gun in Switzerland is strictly registered and every round of ammunition must be accounted for IN WRITING. And handguns are next to impossible to get.

"The only way that a person understands or will comply with anything is with a threat to do bodily harm."
<sarcasm>Yes, that's why I became a Democrat...John Kennedy and his brothers threatened to break my kneecaps unless I became a liberal.</sarcasm>

[lcordero]

30. PULEEZE

I will be changing my party affiliation because people like the Daleys exist in the Democratic Party. These people make Al Capone look like a common street thug.

[MrBenchley]

33. Hahahahahaha...

Who ARE you trying to kid?

[lcordero]

36. Oh?

Why do you think registrations for either of the major parties is down?
I'll tell you why, the people have catched on to both parties and think that they are nothing but a bunch of slimy crooks.

[Name removed]

41. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[lcordero]

32. Since when has Switzerland registered guns?

[MrBenchley]

34. What do you think?

They just hand them out to every numbnutz they see wandering around?

[lcordero]

35. they do and that's why they don't have any issues

[MrBenchley]

38. Ho-kay

Guess there's no reason to keep discussing your fantasies....

[lcordero]

39. The difference between you and me is that I back up what I say

and you don't. You go take your fantasies of a tyrannical goverment someplace else.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/1566715.stm

Instead of a standing, full-time army, the country requires every man to undergo some form of military training for a few days or weeks a year throughout most of their lives.

Between the ages of 21 and 32 men serve as frontline troops. They are given an M-57 assault rifle and 24 rounds of ammunition which they are required to keep at home.

Once discharged, men serve in the Swiss equivalent of the US National Guard, but still have to train occasionally and are given bolt rifles. Women do not have to own firearms, but are encouraged to.

[MrBenchley]

40. Tell us....

Do you think the Swiss don't write down the serial number of each gun and make a note somewhere about whom it was given to? Do you think if they found one lying in the street (after a bank robbery, say) they wouldn't be able to figure out who had it last?

"24 rounds of ammunition"
And they must account for each round in writing.

[lcordero]

50. I see that by the deleted message earlier that you went out of

the boundaries of common courtesy. This debate is done, I don't owe you so much as the facade of civility. Have a good day.

[demsrule4life]

37. Swiss laws aren't all that much different than ours

I shot several pistol matches in Switzerland, and have to disagree that handguns "are next to impossible to get." Also check the area on private sales in the link provided. The every round of ammuntion must be accounted for is for the issue military ammo. The rifles can be taken out and shot with privately bought ammo.


http://www.eda.admin.ch/washington_emb/e/home/legaff/Fact/gunown.html

[MrBenchley]

42. Hilarious and wrong

"Subsequent transfers either by sale or by another transaction among private individuals have to be documented through a written contract between those individuals themselves, which they have to keep for at least ten years."
Yeah, we must have THAT law somewhere on the books, don't we....

[demsrule4life]

43. A written contract between the buyer and seller

no background check or anything. WOW the Swiss loophole.

[beevul]

45. ROFL!!

"WOW the Swiss loophole."


Quality!!


Made my day.:toast:

[CO Liberal]

46. Just Like Swiss Cheese

Full of holes.

[demsrule4life]

15. Your thoughts on a bill coming up in your state

"The Colorado Freedom to Carry Act", a bill to allow law-abiding citizens to carry concealed handguns without going through the burdensome and expensive process of acquiring a permit.

The measure, House Bill 1281, doesn't get rid of the permit process that was passed in the 2003 legislative session. Instead, it merely specifies that citizens who can legally possess handguns under state and federal law -- by definition, law-abiding citizens -- can carry concealed.

"To those who already have or want a concealed handgun permit, this bill changes nothing," Brophy said. "They may want to keep their permits so they can have reciprocity with other states that recognize Colorado's permitting system. However, many citizens can't afford to pay for the expensive training, fingerprinting and bureaucratic process the 2003 law created. And frankly, they shouldn't have to."

:bounce:

[CO Liberal]

18. My Thoughts

The thought of more people carrying concealed weapons does NOT make me feel safer - it just means there are more guns on the streets, and more potential for shootings.

IMHO, it's just another bill being pushed through the Colorado Legislature by brain-dead Republican politicians doing what the gun lobby tells them to.

[demsrule4life]

19. I havent noticed the blood flowing in Vermont

and come to think of it no hate groups either. :)

[CO Liberal]

21. There May Be a COnnection There

Colorado is swarming with hate groups, many of which are disguising themselves as evangelical Christian groups......

[slackmaster]

31. I have to question one of your core assumptions

You assume that a state changing from a discretionary-issue to a shall-issue system actually results in more guns being carried "on the streets".

How can you be sure that the number would actually increase?

Some people who get permits under the new system will have already had one, or perhaps been carrying illegally (as many people do here in California). Permit holders don't carry all the time, only when they feel a need to.

If I got a permit I'd use it only very rarely. I like to have a beer or glass of wine during many of my trips outside the home, so I would never carry a weapon during those excursions. Guns are not allowed in my workplace, so I wouldn't carry one there either.

[MrBenchley]

16. By this "theory"

licensed drivers are admitting their guilt.

[slackmaster]

23. Repeat after me

Driving is a privilege, not a right.

[alwynsw]

26. LOL, too true.

[davidinalameda]

44. back ground checks only work if they're used

my little sister bought a rifle for her ex-husband while they were still married and even after she told them it was going to be a gift, whoever sold her the rifle didn't care--they only did the background check on her and of course, it came up clean

if they had done the background check on the husband, she would have never been allowed to buy it for him

people like him, who have a history of violence, should never be allowed to have guns--I don't care if he paid his debt to society, he is still a danger--my little sister can vouch for that--to the effect that "I'll find you wherever you go"

[Columbia]

47. Straw purchase

Firearms can be legally sold even if they are to be a gift, but only if the recipient of the gift is legally able to possess firearms. The dealer is under no obligation to ensure that all laws are followed after a legal transfer is made. What your sister did is called a straw purchase and is illegal.

Edit to add: Your state laws may vary

[davidinalameda]

48. but she told them that it wasn't for her

they didn't care

they didn't ask who it was for or anything like that

the store dropped the ball on this and you have to wonder how many other guns get into the hands of those who shouldn't

this happened in West Virginia and I don't know what the laws are there

[Columbia]

49. Does not matter

http://www.atf.gov/pub/fire-explo_pub/geninfo.htm

15. "STRAW PURCHASES"

Questions have arisen concerning the lawfulness of firearms purchases from licensees by persons who use "straw purchasers" (another person) to acquire the firearms. Specifically, the actual buyer uses the straw purchaser to execute the Form 4473 purporting to show that the straw purchaser is the actual purchaser of the firearm. In some instances, a straw purchaser is used because the actual purchaser is prohibited from acquiring the firearm. That is to say, the actual purchaser is a felon or is within one of the other prohibited categories of persons who may not lawfully acquire firearms or is a resident of a State other than that in which the licensee's business premises is located. Because of his or her disability, the person uses a straw purchaser who is not prohibited from purchasing a firearm from the licensee. In other instances, neither the straw purchaser nor the actual purchaser is prohibited from acquiring the firearm.

In both instances, the straw purchaser violates Federal law by making false statements on Form 4473 to the licensee with respect to the identity of the actual purchaser of the firearm, as well as the actual purchaser's residence address and date of birth. The actual purchaser who utilized the straw purchaser to acquire a firearm has unlawfully aided and abetted or caused the making of the false statements. The licensee selling the firearm under these circumstances also violates Federal law if the licensee is aware of the false statements on the form. It is immaterial that the actual purchaser and the straw purchaser are residents of the State in which the licensee's business premises is located, are not prohibited from receiving or possessing firearms, and could have lawfully purchased firearms from the licensee.

This article does not purport to cover sales to persons who purchase firearms with the intent of making gifts of such firearms to other persons. In instances such as this, the person making the purchase is indeed the true purchaser. There is no straw purchaser in these instances. The use of gift certificates would also not fall within the category of straw purchases. The person redeeming the gift certificate would be the actual purchaser of the firearm and would be properly reflected as such in the dealer's records.

If the store knew that it was an illegal straw purchase, then they are obligated to stop the sale. However, as you stated, your sister did not tell them that the purchase was for a prohibited person, and not just a gift to a person who is legally able to own firearms (as is often the case). Would it have been prudent for the dealer to inquire more about the purchase? Yes, and during the trasnfer process they should have and probably did made it clear that a purchase for a prohibited person is illegal. But ultimately your sister lied on the 4473 section 12a which is a crime punishable as a felony.